2007-07-26 14:57:23 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You're grilling me about a missing hyphen, and you call it the "United State of AmericaN"? How typical.
2007-07-26 15:06:02 · update #1
None. Don't mistake these "die-hard" supporters for people who simply have a differing political view within the context of Amrican values, culture, and law.
They--and Bush--have made their position quite clear--the do not support the Constitution, they desire a fundamentalist religious state in the USA, and they regard anyone who disagrees with them as an "enemy." Given their disregard for the rights of others, and their open advocascy of genocide against Muslims, that is becoming a self-fufilling prophecy.
Bush could order the nuclear destruction of Iraq and every other Muslim country--they would cheer. He could order all American citizens who are Muslims sent to death camps a la Hitler--they would line up to man the gas chambers.
They are no different than the terrorists--make no mistake about it.
2007-07-26 15:06:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
If he were to be busted listening to Barbara Streisand, while watching "SICKO", and saying something to the effect of how hot he thinks Pelosi is.
All to often both the left and the right get sucked into the "cult of personality" of their chosen leader. Roughly 25% of either side will support their leader no matter what, what usually happens though is the rest of us 50% ers are stuck going WTF.
Well actually what I would call true die-hard conservatives are calling for impeachment.
Bush and his cronies are a parasite on the Republican party, as are groups like ALF a scourge on the Democratic party.
If those that are true conservatives i.e., Goldwater or Bruce Fein types they will start going to their local meetings and pull the Republican party back to their original ideals, and if true liberals would go to their party meetings and pull them back to their ideals, then this country would be back in the middle where it should be. this country was founded on compromise, it can be fixed through compromise.
2007-07-27 01:06:39 · answer #2 · answered by cynical 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Define supporting Bush .
If not supporting Bush, means supporting Democrats, then no, that will never happen.
If you mean not supporting Bush means impeaching him, then no, that will never happen.
But there are alot of republicans who thought we should have never invaded Iraq.
But that doesn't mean, they support withdrawal from Iraq now.
Al-Quada is in Iraq now, and I thought we were at war with Al-quada.
It doesn't matter if al-quada wasn't in iraq before the invasion.
They are there now.
We cannot turn back the clock, we have to deal with the here and now.
Now that doesn't mean, we should keep 150,000 soldiers and Marines in Iraq either.
To many on the left, think that if you don't agree with them, then you must agree with Bush.
Same way to many on the right, think that if you don't agree with Bush, then you must agree with the left.
As a republican, i'll admit it, Bush screwed up the invasion of Iraq big time.
Carl Bremmer was the single biggest mistake Bush made.
His bad decisions are what caused the mess iraq is in today.
But again, we cannot turn the clock back.
So we have to deal with the here and now.
And i don't think the withdrawal proposals coming from the democrats are a good thing.
They just seem to want to leave al-quada in Iraq, or seem to think that if we left Iraq, that al-quada would leave Iraq.
2007-07-26 22:39:44 · answer #3 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If Bush went on the Rush Limbaugh show and pulled out a gun and shot him dead, they might stop supporting him. Other than something along those lines I don't see them giving up their support of Bush. Hell, they cheer him on with every other criminal activity that he gets caught doing.
2007-07-26 22:15:24 · answer #4 · answered by Kerry R 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey, how about you folks using proper English? "die hard conservatives" should be "die-hard conservatives"
Gosh, as long as President Bush displays a much higher standard of morals than his predecesor, NEVER EVER EVER!
You are just upset because he puts his actions where his mouth is, unlike his predecesor. Didn't you see that movie, "Blackhawk Down"? At least, President Bush is not giving control of our military to the U.N. as President Clinton did. Let's face it, in accordance with the laws of the United States of American, Clinton was a traitor and should have been jailed for same, not rewarded with being President.
Go read some history books; blind faith is just that: blindness.
2007-07-26 22:04:33 · answer #5 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Jan 20, 2009
2007-07-26 22:00:04 · answer #6 · answered by Samm 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The day Bush says that he is God and doesnt want to step
down as President when his term is up.
2007-07-26 22:03:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If he divorced Laura, married Dick Cheney, and had sex with him on public television. Then again, nah, they'd probably just blame the Democrats and say it was them who made him do it.
2007-07-26 22:27:33 · answer #8 · answered by The Doctor 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No tax breaks for the wealthy should do the trick
2007-07-26 22:10:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
when you consider the remaining core of his base, that is the common man/woman, and their deep religious convictions, and their total reliance on faith, and his, much highlighted, conversations with god...i think nothing that could be said or done would sway their allegiance to him.
2007-07-26 22:07:57 · answer #10 · answered by jonny y 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋